Publication Ethics

ASEAN Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine (ASEAN J Rehabil Med) adheres to principles of research integrity and aim to avoid any type of scientific misconduct, such as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, redundant publication, or authorship problems. The journal follows the principles by the Committee on Publication (COPE) Guidelines Good Publication Practice for handling allegations of publishing misconduct pre- and post-publication (https://publicationethics.org/files/u7141/1999pdf13.pdf.)

Journal owner, authors, editors, advisory board members and reviewers are expected to carry out their responsibilities in a fair, honest, and ethical manner. If there is any evidence of scientific misconduct or any party becomes aware of attempts to manipulate the peer review process, they must report these incidents to the journal.

The journal owners, authors, editors, and reviewers are required to fulfill their duties with fairness, integrity, and ethical standards. Any evidence of scientific misconduct or attempts to manipulate the peer review process must be reported to the journal. Sanctions for such misconduct are listed in order of severity, beginning with a letter of explanation to the authors and escalating to the most serious measure, which involves reporting the case to the Medical Council or another relevant authority that can investigate and take appropriate action.

The responsibilities of each participant involved in the reviewing process are as follows.

Role and Duties of the Journal Owner

1. The executive committees of the TRMA regularly monitor the editor's performance during the executive meetings. They would only dismiss the editor for some substantial reasons, such as scientific misconduct, inadequate performance, and inappropriate behavior. It is a policy that the advertisement of any sponsor supporting the journal should only be on the back cover of the printed journal.
2. The executive committees of the TRMA declare that there is no article processing charges or submission fees for any submitted or accepted articles.

Roles and Duties of Editor

1. The chief editor works under the guidance of the policies of the Executive committees of the TRMA and regularly reports the Journal's progress and relevant issues at the executive and annual general meetings.
2. The chief editor is responsible for selecting quality manuscripts to be published.
3. The chief editor shall delegate decision-making to one of the associate editors when the editor or colleagues have written a research manuscript.
4. The chief editor uses the journal's electronic submission system for all journal communications and checks for plagiarism and copyright infringement to ensure transparency in the process.
5. The chief editor shall select three suitable reviewers from the editorial board and external reviewers. The reviewers have expertise in the relevant field of the submitted article and do not have a conflict of interest to ensure that a peer review process is fair and unbiased.
6. The editor shall protect the confidentiality of all materials submitted to the journal, all communications with reviewers and authors, and the reviewers' identities, as the journal process of peer review is double-blinded.
7. The editor shall promptly respond to any notification from the authors or a third party about significant errors found in journal articles. In addition, the editor accepts any complaint regarding publication processes. 
8. The editor shall regularly review any research, publication, reviewer, and editorial misconduct. Any identified misconduct is subject to investigation by the Editorial Board of the ASEAN J Rehabil Med. All misconduct and breach of publication ethics, irrespective of the extent thereof, may result in retraction, publication of formal notice of the misconduct, and formal embargo on future contributions to the journal. 

Duties of Reviewers

1. All invited internal and external reviewers shall be informed to follow the journal policy of publishing quality medical research, innovation, review articles, and interesting case reports and case series. The peer review process is a critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to the journal, aiming to help authors and the editor improve the quality of the publication.
2. The invited reviewers can accept or decline the invitation. If there is a conflict, one should decline the invitation. When one accepts to be a peer reviewer, he/she should critically assess the manuscript using the journal criteria for review without personal bias and submit the review with constructive comments and within the timeframe.
3. The invited reviewers should refrain from suggesting that the authors include the reviewers' works to increase the reviewers' citation count but can do so only for a genuine scientific reason.
4. The invited reviewers shall treat all reviewed documents/materials confidential and not directly contact the authors unless the editor gives permission.
5. The invited reviewers must not use a submitted manuscript and its unpublished materials disclosed in their own research without the written consent of the authors. After submitting their reviews, the reviewers must destroy paper copies of manuscripts and delete electronic copies.
6. The invited reviewers shall be asked for permission when the editor considers sharing reviewers' comments with co-reviewers of the same paper to enhance learning from each other.

Roles and Duties of Authors

1. Authors should follow the journal formats when preparing a manuscript and presenting with accurate data, sufficient details and references, and correct interpretation without bias. Inaccurate statements are unacceptable and unethical.
2. Authors should be aware of plagiarism of another's work and self-plagiarism of one own work, which is unethical and unacceptable. Works or words of others should be appropriately cited or quoted, and permission should be received when necessary.
3. All authors are fully responsible for the originality and contents of their submitted manuscripts. All records and data presented in the manuscripts must be accurate and free of research misconduct, such as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or any other research or publication misconduct. 
4. When reporting on research that involves human subjects, human material, human tissues, or human data, approval from the local institutional review board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committees must be obtained before undertaking the research.
5. Authors should be concerned about authorship, which is limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, interpretation, writing, and approval of the manuscript. Therefore, only those with substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors, and others, including research funder/supporters, should be acknowledged in the acknowledgment section.
6. Authors should disclose any potential conflict of interest or financial and personal relationships with others that could influence the submitted work in the disclosure section.
7. Authors should write a cover letter to the editor confirming that the submitted manuscript is original and has not been published or submitted to another journal.
8. A corresponding author should be responsible for online submission, revising according to peer reviewers' suggestions, communicating with the editor during and after the publication process, and promptly responding to editorial queries.
9. Authors should promptly notify the editor of a significant error or inaccuracy found in their published article so that the editor can do whatever is necessary, such as correcting or retracting the article.
10. Authors should contact the chief editor or the president of the TRMA to appeal against the editorial decision.

Ethical Concerns in Human Subjects Research

When conducting experiments involving humans, authors need to consider ethical considerations to ensure the participants' welfare, safety, and rights. Here are some critical ethical: 

1. Informed Consent: Authors must ensure that participants provide informed consent before participating in the study. This involves providing detailed information about the study's purpose, procedures, potential risks, benefits, and the voluntary nature of participation. Participants should be able to understand the information and make an informed decision.
2. Beneficence and Non-Maleficence: Authors should prioritize the well-being of participants and minimize any potential harm. The potential benefits of the study should outweigh the risks. Researchers should reduce risks and ensure participants' safety throughout the study.
3. Privacy and Confidentiality: Authors must protect participants' privacy and ensure the confidentiality of their personal information. Data collection, storage, and publication should maintain participant anonymity and confidentiality.
4. Institutional Review Board (IRB) Approval: Authors should obtain approval from an IRB or an ethics committee before conducting the study. IRBs review research protocols to ensure they meet ethical standards and protect participants' rights.
5. Data Handling and Reporting: Authors should handle data responsibly and accurately report the findings. This includes maintaining the confidentiality of participants' information and presenting the results unbiased and transparently.

Declaration of Generative AI

1. Where authors use generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, authors should only use these technologies to improve readability and language. The technology should be applied with human oversight and control. Authors should carefully review and edit the results.
2. If the authors decide to use it. They must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process by adding a statement at the end of their manuscript in the core manuscript file before the references list. 
      
   Statement: During the preparation of this work, the author (s) used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author (s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the publication's content.
   
   
3. This declaration does not apply to essential tools for checking grammar, spelling, references, etc. There is no need to add a statement if there is nothing to disclose.

         It's important to note that ethical considerations may vary across countries and institutions. Authors should familiarize themselves with the ethical guidelines and regulations applicable to their research context. Consulting with institutional ethics committees or relevant authorities can provide further guidance on ethical considerations for human research studies.